Oscar Wilde once observed that “the only way to get rid of a temptation is to yield to it.” As we stand at the precipice of the AI revolution in content creation, Wilde’s words have never felt more relevant – or more dangerous.
Wilde’s words in this context make the point that AI tools are very very tempting – they lure us with the promise of “easiness” and we are hungry for ways to be lazy.
This is dangerous because prices for AI tools will rise dramatically soon (the company behind Claude has announced a 400% price rise for its new versions) and, just like a drug dealer getting people hooked on free or cheap samples, we might end up trapped, having lost our skills to write independently of AI support.
Stand by for a long article with plenty of cut and pasted text so you can see all the workings behind the curtain.
The Voice Capture Framework
This post is a companion piece to a webinar I ran yesterday on how to train AI to mimic your voice. I am going to use some of the elements from that workshop in this post, using ourselves as an example.
Our journey began with a fundamental framework for capturing voice – these are the things you need to consider:
Tone: [e.g., friendly, formal, casual, professional]
Style: [e.g., conversational, informative, humorous, technical]
Language and Dialect: [e.g., American English, British English, Australian English]
Speech Patterns: [e.g., uses idioms, avoids jargon, includes metaphors]
Audience: [e.g., children, experts, general public]
Level of Detail: [e.g., concise summaries, in-depth explanations, step-by-step instructions]
Additional Preferences: [e.g., asks rhetorical questions, uses first-person perspective, incorporates storytelling]
First Attempt at Voice Capture
I took the Talking About Marketing Podcast as my guinea pig for the workshop. I am one of the hosts and David Olney is the other one. Together, we have a particular chemistry that I wanted to capture for the purpose of writing the show notes that complement each episode.
My initial attempt to capture our podcast’s voice looked like this:
Tone: Warm, authoritative but driven by an eager sense of curiosity to understand and then share insights with others
Style: Informative, sometimes technical, often infused with some dry humour quips
Language and Dialect: Australian English, but never with Australian slang
Speech Patterns: Strives to use analogies to make things understandable, typically one speaker holds the stage and then throws to the other to seek their opinion, avoids jargon, includes metaphors when needed
Audience: Small business owners or leaders
Level of Detail: Start segments with an overview, then use some specific examples and direct quotes to prompt further discussion about how the topic practically applies to the daily life and work of the listener
Additional Preferences: There should be a relaxed but highly engaged feel to this voice.
The AI Analysis
The test then came when we fed a transcript from Season 1, Episode 9 into Claude AI, and asked it if what it read in that transcript sat well with my first attempt of defining our “voice”. Here’s the transcript sample I shared with it:
Caitlin Davis: Our four P’s. Number two, principles. You can never be overdressed or over educated. Oscar Wilde.
Steve Davis: David, for the principles segment, we’re going to draw upon some work from Blair Warren’s 2022 book called the one sentence persuasion course, 27 words to make the world do your bidding. You have brought this to my attention. Have you used this technique against me?
David Olney: No, not you, but have used it in America on attorneys in my other job and doubled the click rate on emails.[00:15:00]
Steve Davis: Wow. All right. Let’s unpack this. How would you like to tackle this enigma of getting people to do things you want them to do through the use of a clever choice of words? Thank you.
David Olney: Maybe a little bit of context and then I’ll get you to read his single sentence. So Blair Warren is a very good marketer.
He’s also, I think, been a screenwriter and he has been fascinated for decades on how persuasion works. So unlike Robert Cialdini, or Nick Kalenda, he has not written big, long books because what he was looking for was the 80 20 rule, the Pareto principle version of understanding persuasion. What small things can you use to be persuasive 80% of the time?
And what he found is That in this single sentence he devised, if you do the five things in it, you will persuade most people [00:16:00] most of the time, because you keep doubling down on what people want to hear. It’s a rather confronting sentence, because it’s relying on negativity bias, which is why it’s working so well.
It’s also, Taking people’s responsibility for failure away, which makes them feel good. And it’s letting them know you will help them achieve their ends versus other people, which is the ultimate nasty win in persuasion sort of science. So whenever you’re ready, I’ll get you to read the sentence for the listener.
Steve Davis: People will do anything for those who encourage their dreams. Justify their failures, allay their fears, confirm their suspicions, and help them throw rocks at their enemies.
David Olney: Now I will get you to read that again [00:17:00] because it really doesn’t sink in for most people until the second time.
Steve Davis: People will do anything for those who encourage their dreams.
Justify their failures. Allay their fears. Confirm their suspicions. And help them throw rocks at their enemies.
David Olney: Now, my first response to this was Yuck! Is that really how communications work? And then I started breaking it down and went Okay, the first thing is encourage people’s dreams. Well, that works. If you tell people what they want to achieve as possible, they start paying attention. If you justify their failures, why they haven’t got there yet, then you’re tapping into sort of Carol Dweck’s stuff on mindset, of the difference between having a fixed and growth mindset.
If you say, well, you haven’t got there yet because you just don’t have the skills ready yet, but [00:18:00] here’s what we do to get there, you then, you know, allay their fears and go, well, I know what all the skills are you need to learn to achieve what you want to do, and I can help you learn them. Then you confirm their suspicions.
Yes, of course, it is hard, and not everyone’s going to achieve it. But not everyone has the advantage of being you, and having me as an advisor. And the one I stopped short at, because this is the one that Blair Warren really drew out of historical examples, particularly looking at people like Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, was offering to help throw rocks at people’s enemies.
And that one, I’m just like, no, let’s just not go there. But the first four together are incredibly powerful, uncomfortably so.
Steve Davis: Look, I think you and I have very similar intuitions around this, and can we though, hypothetically think of a rationale in which it would [00:19:00] be okay to use your communication to help throw rocks at a mutual Enemy, and I’m wondering whether in a straw man scenario where you’ve built up a, a, a mythical issue or something that isn’t actually citing actual physical or emotional violence on anyone, psychological violence, but is venting frustrations because of some common scourge.
David Olney: I think the only time I’ve felt comfortable with it when I think about it is if we can use it to get rid of racism, if we can use it to get rid of sexism, if we can throw rocks at old enemies, that, you know, I can see value in. Okay. And I think the other reason, listen, that we’re talking about this is if you understand this sentence.
You can prime yourself to be aware if anyone’s trying this on you. And that is very important because [00:20:00] we aren’t the only communications people who found this and recognized it works. And you need to be aware that if something’s flowing in a way where you just find yourself going down the rabbit hole of going, this is really convincing, really fast, and I’m really comfortable to do whatever they ask me next.
Hang on, have you literally just been Blair Warrened?
Steve Davis: Yes, there’s a variation of that. I remember I used to teach a media literacy class for different school groups and one of them was just making them aware of if you’re watching the news or reading the news and feeling yourself getting emotionally stirred up, is that legitimate or are you being played with?
Is the journalist or the news outlet going for that easy lever? To keep you glued and stirred up so that you stay connected to the channel. We keep this in the small business, small to medium enterprise focus and, and try to find the positives. To encourage the dreams of the person you’re writing to, [00:21:00] justify their failures, etc.
David Olney: And allay their fears. Those three definitely, I think, are massively helpful.
Steve Davis: To do that. You need to know who the heck you’re writing to, which means we can’t shake off the necessity of being clear about our buyer personas, can we?
David Olney: No, we are absolutely back in persona land. The big thing that comes out of Blair Warren’s little book, and it is a little book, is how deeply he researched how well highly persuasive communicators understand their audience.
Steve Davis: There’s one other part to this, which is where the title of this episode is drawn from, and I’ve slightly paraphrased this summary. He says, our job as marketers and communicators is to try to validate and fascinate people rather than trying to correct and convince them. It’s pretty good.
David Olney: It’s very good because it’s doing what we try and help clients do so often, and making [00:22:00] them realize, hang on, if someone’s searching for information, they’re doing it because they’ve got a need to solve a problem or a desire to achieve a goal, and the research will become rational, but it’s primarily emotionally driven.
And validation and fascination are highly emotional. And correcting and convincing is highly rational. And actually, unless it’s professionals talking to other professionals using common language, common tools, common rules, common facts, correction and convincing just makes most people turn off to most things.
Steve Davis: Yeah, because you sense it’s suddenly getting serious and they’re pushing you towards purchasing and most of us don’t mind buying, we just hate being sold to, for having pushed to that, we like to own that journey.
David Olney: Whereas if you can just say to people, well done for narrowing it down to some really good products, you know, validate to start with and to fascinate, go, and now tell me what it is [00:23:00] you really need the product to do, so I can show you how ours does it for you.
Steve Davis: Would you recommend this as a book to read or just taking this sentence from our show notes and Reflecting on that would that be enough?
David Olney: I think for anyone who has had a huge amount of professional training So that their default way of communicating is to be rational first and to use Profession specific language first.
Reading this book is a great way to realize why you need to change your language to effectively talk to lay people and beginner mind people. And why when you talk to marketing people like us, we’re going to keep challenging you with different kinds of language. This book will help you understand your marketers better and understand your clients better.
So definitely worth a read.
Steve Davis: That’s Blair Warren’s book, it’s called The One Sentence Persuasion Course, 27 Words to Make the World Do Your Bidding. Now don’t go away, [00:24:00] because Problems is next.
So, that was the text we fed it. Now, here is what Claude’s verdict was about how accurate (or otherwise) my attempt at defining our voice was:
Let me analyze the tone instructions versus the actual conversation between Steve and David.
The tone instructions specify:
- Warm, authoritative but driven by curiosity
- Informative with dry humor
- Australian English without slang
- Uses analogies and metaphors
- Relaxed but highly engaged feel
- Start with overview then specific examples
Looking at the actual conversation, I notice some differences and would suggest these refinements to make the tone instructions more accurate:
- The actual conversation shows more collaborative back-and-forth than the instructions suggest. Rather than “one speaker holds the stage,” Steve and David frequently build on each other’s points and ask for each other’s perspectives. I’d modify this to emphasize their conversational interplay.
- There’s a strong analytical and ethical dimension missing from the instructions. Both speakers regularly pause to examine the ethical implications of concepts (like their discomfort with the “throwing rocks” aspect) and encourage critical thinking. This should be added to the tone description.
- The instruction about “dry humor” doesn’t quite capture their style. Their humor is more warmly ironic and self-aware (like David’s “Have you used this technique against me?” and “Have you literally just been Blair Warrened?”).
- The speakers demonstrate more meta-commentary about communication itself than the instructions suggest. They frequently analyze how and why certain communication techniques work or don’t work.
I’d suggest adding these elements to the tone instructions:
- Collaborative and builds on each other’s insights
- Includes ethical reflection and critical analysis
- Uses warm, self-aware humor rather than just dry humor
- Regularly examines communication principles and effectiveness
- Balances theoretical concepts with practical business applications
- Encourages listener critical thinking about communication techniques
The existing elements about being warm, informative, and using analogies are spot-on, but these additions would better capture the nuanced way Steve and David interact and analyze topics together.
The Refined Voice Guide
This led to a more nuanced understanding of our voice. This is the modified version that Claude came up with:
Here’s my proposed rewrite of the tone instructions:
Tone: Warm and intellectually curious, balancing authoritative knowledge with collaborative exploration. Both speakers readily acknowledge uncertainties and invite deeper analysis.
Style: Analytical and informative, enriched with warm, self-aware humor. Frequently pauses to examine ethical implications and encourage critical thinking.
Language and Dialect: Australian English, professionally casual but precise. Technical terms are immediately followed by practical explanations.
Speech Patterns:
- Collaborative back-and-forth with speakers building on each other’s insights
- Uses real-world analogies and metaphors to clarify complex concepts
- Regularly circles back to examine why communication techniques work or don’t work
- Balances theoretical discussion with practical business applications
- Often uses self-referential examples from their own experiences
- Comfortable with expressing ethical reservations and exploring implications
Audience: Small business owners or leaders who want to understand both the ‘how’ and ‘why’ of business communication
Level of Detail:
- Opens topics with a framework or key concept
- Unpacks ideas through specific examples and real-world applications
- Uses direct quotes or concepts as jumping-off points for deeper discussion
- Regularly connects back to practical business implementation
- Encourages listeners to think critically about how concepts apply to their own context
Additional Preferences:
- Maintains a relaxed but intellectually engaged atmosphere
- Comfortable with complexity while staying accessible
- Both speakers freely express initial reactions and then analyze them deeper
- Welcomes ethical questioning of marketing and communication techniques
- Uses meta-commentary to examine communication principles in action
- Balances professional expertise with genuine human reactions to concepts
Testing the New Guidelines
The real test came with Season 5, Episode 9. This is a new episode that won’t be released until Tuesday, December 10, 2024, at 3am.
As you’ll see, the first AI-generated show notes were technically accurate but missed our essence:
Making Long Stories Short: The Art of Brevity and Authenticity
Summary sentence: Willie Nelson’s insights on brevity and John Cleese’s wisdom on collaborative creativity combine to show us that excellence in communication comes not from length, but from capturing essence and fostering trust.
Short summary section: Willie Nelson shares his philosophy on storytelling, demonstrating how less can be more when crafting messages that resonate with audiences.
John Cleese reveals the power of creative collaboration and the importance of creating safe spaces for idea generation.
LinkedIn’s AI data collection practices raise questions about digital privacy and corporate transparency.
A fascinating look at the evolution of marketing credentials, from “As Seen on TV” to modern business awards.
Get ready to take notes.
Person segment: The Willie Nelson School of Brevity Willie Nelson’s new book “Energy Follows Thought: The Stories Behind My Songs” offers profound insights into the art of brevity in storytelling. Nelson emphasizes that good storytelling is disciplined storytelling, advocating for keeping messages under three minutes and getting to the heart of feelings quickly for maximum impact.
Nelson’s approach to songwriting, where he lets words come first and trusts that melodies will follow, demonstrates the power of focusing on core message before embellishment. His philosophy that “less is more” serves as a valuable lesson for business communicators who often struggle with information overload.
The segment explores how this approach to concise communication can benefit business owners, particularly when crafting messages for time-poor audiences.
Principles segment: John Cleese on Creative Collaboration Drawing from John Cleese’s insights on creativity, this segment explores how group dynamics can enhance creative problem-solving. Cleese emphasizes the importance of creating a safe space for creativity, where participants feel confident to play with ideas without fear of negative judgment.
The discussion examines the Japanese business practice of having junior team members speak first in meetings, demonstrating how structural choices can foster more inclusive and creative discussions. This approach helps prevent the stifling of fresh perspectives that might contradict senior viewpoints.
The segment also highlights the value of using techniques like nominal group processes to ensure all voices are heard, particularly in planning sessions where not everyone might be comfortable speaking up.
Problems segment: LinkedIn’s AI Training Data Collection The segment addresses LinkedIn’s practice of collecting user data to train its AI models, initially done without explicit user consent except in the European Economic Area and Switzerland. This data collection now extends to Microsoft’s broader AI initiatives, including the integration of Copilot into Office 365.
This practice raises important questions about data privacy, consent, and the balance between user benefits and corporate interests. The discussion explores the implications for business professionals and considers whether users should receive more direct benefits, such as free Premium memberships, in exchange for their data.
Perspicacity segment: The Evolution of Marketing Credentials Starting with the iconic “As Seen on TV” badge from the Demtel era, this segment examines how marketing credentials have evolved. The discussion categorizes modern business awards into three tiers: rigorous industry awards requiring substantial effort (green light), networking-focused recognition programs (amber light), and pay-to-play schemes (red light).
The segment explores how the proliferation of awards and credentials might be diminishing their overall value, while acknowledging that they continue to influence consumer perception. The discussion includes a practical experiment demonstrating how easily fake credentials can generate engagement on social media.
Meta description: From Willie Nelson’s songwriting wisdom to LinkedIn’s AI data practices, explore how brevity, creativity, and authenticity shape modern business communication.
I then provided this feedback to Claude:
I think we need to make some changes to the voice style so the show notes capture more of our levity and quick wittedness. They are thorough but they are reading a bit dry to me. These show notes should distill the source thought or material but particularly highlight some of the insights that Steve and David have brought to the conversation – that’s the interesting bit, that’s what makes us different from just googling the topic. I will need to take your direction on rewording the source style document about the podcast and the writing style notes.
After providing this feedback, we received this vastly improved version:
When Willie Nelson Meets LinkedIn: The Art of Saying More With Less
Summary sentence: From Willie Nelson’s masterclass in brevity to the unsettling world of corporate data harvesting, we explore how sometimes the shortest path to persuasion involves knowing when to stop talking (and when to check those privacy settings).
Short summary section: Willie Nelson shows us why getting to the point isn’t just good songwriting – it’s good business sense, especially when your audience’s attention span is shorter than a country music chorus.
John Cleese reveals why creativity loves company (as long as it’s the right company) and why the Japanese might be onto something with their “juniors first” approach to meetings.
LinkedIn’s quiet data collection for AI training has us wondering if we should be getting premium memberships in exchange for our digital breadcrumbs.
Steve conducts a cheeky experiment with fake business awards that has everyone (except one sharp-eyed Rotarian) fooled.
Get ready to take notes.
Person segment: Willie Nelson’s Guide to Not Wearing Out Your Welcome Drawing from his new book “Energy Follows Thought,” Willie Nelson shares why sometimes eight lines are better than eighty. His approach to songwriting – get the story right first, then worry about the melody – offers a fresh perspective on business communication. As Steve and David unpack Willie’s philosophy, they reveal why “less is more” isn’t just a cliché when you’re fighting for attention in a world of information overload.
The hosts explore how this meshes with their own experiences in business communication, noting that while verbose marketers might love the sound of their own voice, their audiences rarely share the enthusiasm.
Principles segment: John Cleese and the Art of Group Think (The Good Kind) When John Cleese talks creativity, our hosts lean in – especially when he outlines why the best ideas often come from collaboration, provided you’re not sharing the room with idea-killers. David and Steve explore how this mirrors their own experiences in marketing mentorship, highlighting the value of creating spaces where people feel safe to contribute without fear of judgment.
The discussion takes an intriguing turn through Japanese business culture, where letting junior staff speak first isn’t just polite – it’s strategic. As our hosts note, this approach might just be the antidote to the “but we’ve always done it this way” syndrome that plagues many businesses.
Problems segment: LinkedIn’s Data Harvest (Or: Why Your Professional Profile Is Training Someone Else’s AI) In a revelation that had both hosts raising their eyebrows, we learn about LinkedIn’s practice of using member data to train AI models. Steve and David dig into the implications, noting how European privacy laws forced a different approach across the pond while the rest of us clicked “agree” without reading the fine print.
The discussion evolves into a broader examination of digital privacy and corporate transparency, with David suggesting that if companies want to use our data, maybe they should at least buy us dinner first (or at least a Premium membership).
Perspicacity segment: The Great Awards Game From the nostalgic world of “As Seen on TV” badges to today’s proliferation of business awards, Steve and David create a traffic light system for credential credibility. The segment culminates in Steve’s mischievous experiment with a completely fabricated award that garnered genuine congratulations – proving that perhaps we’ve all become a bit too quick to celebrate without verification.
Meta description: From Willie Nelson’s songwriting wisdom to the art of creative collaboration, discover why sometimes the shortest path to marketing success is knowing when to stop talking.
The Final Evolution
This journey led us to our most refined voice guide yet:
Talking About Marketing Tone Of Voice
Core Identity (New Section)
- Intellectual curiosity meets practical business sense
- Permission to challenge marketing conventions while respecting fundamental principles
- Dynamic interplay between storytelling and analysis
- Balance of skepticism and optimism about marketing practices
Tone
Warm and intellectually curious, balancing authoritative knowledge with collaborative exploration. Both speakers readily acknowledge uncertainties and invite deeper analysis. Comfortable challenging assumptions while maintaining mutual respect.
Style
- Analytical and informative, enriched with warm, self-aware humour
- Uses humor to deflate marketing pomposity while still respecting underlying principles
- Embraces tangential thoughts that often yield unexpected insights
- Values authenticity over corporate speak
- Frequently pauses to examine ethical implications and encourage critical thinking
Language and Dialect
- Australian English, professionally casual but precise
- Technical terms immediately followed by practical explanations
- Frequent use of metaphor and analogy to make complex concepts accessible
- Permission to use industry jargon when appropriate, but always with explanation
Speech Patterns
- Collaborative back-and-forth with speakers building on each other’s insights
- Uses real-world analogies and metaphors to clarify complex concepts
- “Let’s unpack this” moments that signal deeper analysis
- Regularly circles back to examine why communication techniques work or don’t work
- Balances theoretical discussion with practical business applications
- Often uses self-referential examples from their own experiences
- Comfortable with expressing ethical reservations and exploring implications
- Comfortable challenging each other’s assumptions while maintaining mutual respect
Dynamic Elements (New Section)
- Steve: Expansive storytelling, loves to explore ideas from multiple angles
- David: Concise insights, brings discussions back to practical applications
- Both: Challenge marketing conventions while respecting fundamental principles
Audience
Small business owners or leaders who want to understand both the ‘how’ and ‘why’ of business communication, appreciate intellectual depth without pretension
Level of Detail
- Opens topics with a framework or key concept
- Unpacks ideas through specific examples and real-world applications
- Uses direct quotes or concepts as jumping-off points for deeper discussion
- Regularly connects back to practical business implementation
- Encourages listeners to think critically about how concepts apply to their own context
Additional Preferences
- Maintains a relaxed but intellectually engaged atmosphere
- Comfortable with complexity while staying accessible
- Both speakers freely express initial reactions and then analyse them deeper
- Welcomes ethical questioning of marketing and communication techniques
- Uses meta-commentary to examine communication principles in action
- Balances professional expertise with genuine human reactions to concepts
- Values unexpected connections and insights that emerge through conversation
- Encourages questioning of conventional wisdom while maintaining respect for proven principles
The Paradoxical Truth
Here’s the fascinating paradox: By using AI to help capture our voice, we actually became more aware of what makes our voice distinctive. It’s like using a mirror to perfect your posture – the tool helps you see yourself more clearly.
What once took 45 minutes of careful segment-by-segment processing now takes 60 seconds. This efficiency doesn’t make us lazy; it frees us to focus on what matters most – creating valuable content for our audience.
Oscar Wilde also said, “In matters of grave importance, style, not sincerity, is the vital thing.” In our case, we’ve found that by understanding our style more deeply through this AI experiment, we’ve actually enhanced our sincerity. We’ve yielded to the temptation of AI assistance but maintained our soul in the process.
The key isn’t to resist the AI temptation entirely but to yield to it thoughtfully, using it as a tool for enhancement rather than replacement. After all, the best way to maintain control over a temptation might just be to understand it completely.